XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
   From: stevet810@gmail.com   
      
   On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 07:40:03AM +0000, Frieda Perkins wrote:   
   > Vincent Maycock  wrote:   
   >   
   > >On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:07:21 -0500, duke  wrote:   
   > >   
   > >>On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 14:52:21 -0400, Vincent Maycock    
   > >>wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >>>On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 09:15:16 -0500, duke  wrote:   
   > >>>   
   > >>>>On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 17:12:10 -0400, Vincent Maycock    
   > >>>>wrote:   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>>In standard Christian theology, God cares about the lost but has other   
   > >>>>>things to contend with that prevent him from helping them.   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>Haahaahaa.  Vince, that's the most stupid comment I've ever had the   
   > >>>>misfortune   
   > >>>>to witness.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>No, Christians do it all the time; "God had to do this because ..." or   
   > >>>"the only we way could truly have free will is if God ..." etc., etc.   
   > >>   
   > >>And your massive error suggests God is too busy.  Haahaahaa.   
   > >   
   > >The things that get in the way did not include "things that take up   
   > >his time," idiot.   
   > >   
   > >>>>>So if we assume he can, then the resolution to the conundrum would be   
   > >>>>>that God simultaneously can and can't lift the rock; in this idea, he   
   > >>>>>exists in a superposition of states like those found in quantum   
   > >>>>>mechanics.   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>Why should the creator of the universe be unable to lift the heaviest   
   > >>>>rock?   
   > >>>No, it's not "the heaviest rock."   
   > >>   
   > >>>The conundrum goes: "Can God make a rock so big he can't lift it?"   
   > >>>If he succeeds at making the rock, then "being able to lift it" is   
   > >>>something he can't do, which means he's not omnipotent.   
   > >>   
   > >>The conundrum makes the wild assumption of error that "God can't lift it".   
   > >   
   > >No, it's not an assumption; it's part of a conundrum that goes "either   
   > >way, you lose."   
   >   
   > It's an assumption, founded on the notion of human logic. Please present   
   > your evidence for this "God" being bound by human logic.   
   >   
   > What's that? You can't? Oh, well. Back to the drawing board for you.   
      
   Oh I hear you.  How about that government mathematics that they use   
   for accounting purposes?  So different from normal mathematics that   
   the rest of us have to use.   
      
      
      
   --   
   "Great Rossiya has so many tanks, when tank gets stuck in mud, another   
   drives over it! Then we cross the mud with the tanks!"   
         -- Hodor_The_Great in Reddit on the superiority of Russian armor   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)